Friday, February 28, 2014

Our treaty with Ukraine. Shit just got real.

Massive thanks to Max Headroom for this link!

via the Telegraph

*The agreement sees signatories promise to protect Ukraine's borders
*Signed by Bill Clinton, John Major, Boris Yeltsin and Leonid Kuchma in 1994
Ukrainian parliament has now reached out directly to all the countries who signed the treaty
*The US and Britain have both made 'crisis calls' to President Putin to warn him to respect territorial boundaries
NATO also asked Russia not to take action that could escalate tension,
*However Moscow responded by telling the organization to 'refrain' from provocative statements on Ukraine and respect its 'non-bloc' status

Ukraine is saying that it has been invaded (Crimea) and that the treaty is activated.

If the Obama Administration can't legalize its way out of this and IF they don't do anything and IF Putin pushes the issue, then the reputation of this country is garbage until Obama leaves office (assuming that it isn't already).

I thought Syria was embarrassing but this has just become the most serious foreign policy test of the administration.

Y'know how to avert a full-blown war with Putin over Ukraine? Do you what it takes?

It's simply takes ONE GOOD LAWYER. Yessiree. All you need is one good lawyer to tell Obama, "The US is NOT entitled to intervene over (for example) the Russian invasion of Ukraine BECAUSE ...".

All Obama needs is ONE GOOD REASON not to intervene. Just one. That's all.

Obama already did with Syria when he left everyone in the EU in the dry when he reneged on his promise to intervene if the Syrians used chemical warfare. Irrefutable proof was presented to him.

I am not sure if everyone is looking the future implication. What happens if Russia goes in, by force, and re-installs Yurichenko? What happens if Obama was able to find one good reason NOT to intervene? What does this mean to any defense treaty signed with other nations.

China wants to know. They want to give the Philippines military "what they deserve". Once the Philippines (a walk in the park) is done, who's next? Japan? South Korea? How about TAIWAN?

Oh please. What irrefutable proof? You had none. What you had was faulty, probably fake and pulled out of someone's ass, excuse for a proof. There's an MIT study[1] that basically said there's no way the attack was done from the areas controlled by SAA. The consensus among Russian diplomats is that the attack was perpetrated by Saudi infiltrators.

It's getting more clear how the US chose to conduct its foreign policy: by supporting non-state actors of dubious conduct and creed in overthrowing legitimate governments. Lets just lay it all on the table now, this is empire games; nothing to do about freedom or democracy -- if the US cared so much about it, it would have invaded Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain and all these other despotic middle east monarchies. What would the US do if Sergey Lavrov was seen distributing cookies to violent rioters hell bent on overthrowing the legitimate government of say, Canada?

What about the US's drone strikes? Are those not acts of terrorism? You could be targeted for having the wrong brand and model of wrist watch, or attend the wrong mosque, or just happen to live in the neighborhood of someone the US just wants to kill. No trial, just capital punishment with some "collateral damage" for good measure.

Such rogue behaviors will not win you any friends in the long term. I want to like the US, but with each passing day, I feel the US is becoming more and more of a threat to world peace.

So, okay, Russia takes over or launches some attacks to grab Crimea. What does the US do? You really believe the public cares about Crimea? Most Americans can't put Iraq or Afghanistan on the map and we occupied both countries for 10 years.... and that's just on the PR side.

What assets are close or can be moved quickly? If Russians move in, it's going to be with heavy gear which means US response at best will be US Airborne with maybe some light Marine Corps unit is really just there to be a trip wire, get killed which forces US to move heavy units like tank divisions which take time....

US isn't going to fly in a division of Abrams/Bradley's plus all the gear, also you need army aviation plus USAF has to bring the fast jets....does the USA really want to start WWIII? I don't think so,

Russia is right on the door step of Ukraine and we have to move everything in, just the logistics would be a nightmare.

whats your point? that it would be hard? that it would require a national effort? that it just isn't worth it?

i don't deny any of that.

but you can't deny this.

we signed a fucking treaty. we made a pact with Ukraine that if they were invaded that we would come to their assistance. i didn't sign the damn thing. you didn't, but the guy that was President of the United States at the time did. additionally no one rescinded the treaty, modified it or even said that it was a bad idea.

so whether we like it or not we are bound.

but the issue is even bigger. if our allies see that we will not respond to treaty obligations then why would they continue to assist us or acquiesce to our requests? start with Israel move on to Japan and then circle the globe. we tell Israel that we will defend them against an Iranian strike so they give diplomacy a chance. after this will they still trust us? we tell Japan that we will defend them against Chinese aggression, after this will they trust us?

you can't just be flippant in your thinking about this issue. this thing will have consequences. worldwide consequences that will affect events if we fuck it up...and we're halfway there already.

Ok, so I 'm maybe being flippant about the issue but what exactly are Obama's options? It's easy for us on a blog to talk about using force but okay, what do we do for real?

Moving a carrier into the Black Sea? Can we even do that? Do we have an Marine Corps amphib group near by? Move in some F22s to Turkey? Patriot missiles? We still have some army units in Germany, I think?

Forget the Europeans, you aren't getting anything from them! So once again, it's US forces that have to move in and how exactly do you sell that to the US public? When once again, the Europeans will be just watching or sending some token force? The PR is important here, yeah, Obama should do something but how much is the country going to want to get involved for Crimea or Ukraine sake?

What I am saying is once we start moving assets, it's going to be game on. Russian vs USA? Anyone really in a hurry for that?!? I'm not!

It's inevitable, really. This has WWIII written all over it, and it could break out tomorrow or within 5 years. This is going to go down in one of three ways:

1) Russia invades Ukraine, U.S and U.K honor their treaty with Ukraine and declare war on Russia. While it's looking like a Russian invasion of Ukraine (at least of Crimea) is a real possibility now, I think this is the most unlikely scenario in that I would be shocked if the leaders of the U.S and U.K risk direct war with Russia.

2)Russia invades Ukraine and the west does nothing. America is no longer seen as being willing to enforce any treaty or agreement that would lead to a major war. Israel, having lost all faith in Washington to honor it's commitment to prevent an atomic Iran, launches a preemptive strike against Iran's nuclear program. Iran retaliates by attacking Israel, Saudi Arabia, and U.S interests in the Persian Gulf. This forces America to become involved in a major regional war.

3) Russia invades Ukraine and the west does nothing. America is no longer seen as being willing to enforce any treaty or agreement that would lead to a major war. Chinese leadership decide that America will not be willing to use military force to secure the South China Sea. The Chinese launch a campaign to seize all disputed territory both in the South and East China Sea. The U.S is forced to intervene to prevent China from controlling so much of the world's tanker traffic. I view this as the most likely scenario.

If scenario 1 plays out (unlikely), we're at war within weeks. If scenario 2 plays out, we're at war within one or two years. If 3 plays out, we're at war within 5 years. There's definitely a possibility 2 and 3 could happen concurrently.

Obviously there's a chance that the situation resolves itself but at this point I think the best we can hope for is a new Cold War.

I don't necessary disagree with you Patrick. I have been reading comments on other sites complaining about how Obama is a traitor or weak but never see what they would do instead. I really am just trying to see what options the USA really has, not far fetched or just nuke the bastards crap.....

We should have Turkey on board as they traditionally hate Russians and have fought against them in the past. You should be able to buy Romania access and bases. So that's the good news. The bad news is what do we send over there? 101st? Special Forces? As soon as US ground troops hit the ground in Ukraine, you just gave Putin the perfect excuse to occupy with his troops and armor Crimea. It's immediate escalation but I doubt we have the forces to properly respond in time to how close and fast Putin can get into Crimea.

Still haven't heard how anyone wants to sell this to US public. Ukraine isn't part of NATO and the "treaty" has been said by already some UK politicians to be more of a "non binding diplomatic document" whatever the hell that means....or it means we ain't sending our troops to die for Sevastopol.

Best strategy would kinda be an Afghan 2.0 at the moment - support dissident groups in Crimea with advanced arms/training so they can bleed out the Russians in their rear. About 40% of people in Crimea aren't Russian so there's still a sizable minority who's likely willing to resist a Russian takeover. Ditto for Venezuela - throw arms at the Venezuelan opposition and get them to topple the Venezuelan regime. You mess with our friends in your backyard then we'll mess with your friends in our backyard. Strongly lean on the Nicaraguans - imply that if they let Russian forces base out of their territory then they'll get the Maduro treatment. Throw our latest weaponry at Georgia and help them transform the Russia-Georgian border into the heaviest fortified DMZ next to Korea. Then grow some fucking balls and say any Chinese takeover of any disputed island in the East or South China Sea WILL lead to direct U.S military intervention.

The US will do as it did with the Georgian invasion, bitch, whine, bluster and braggadocio but little else.This is not Iran, Iraq nor Afganistan. These are Russian's they will dig in their heels and fight...hard.They will sink shipping, bottle up air shipping then turn the gas off to the Euro's.Ukraine! Here is some advice, do not make a stand, accept willingly occupation do not give them a reason to fight you.Emerging as an intact Vassal state is more preferable than emerging as a destroyed as well as a depopulated, except for ethnic Russians, vassal state.Do not depend on BHO, he ain't in it for you guys and he is all mouth.

The Russian is a Slav and Scandinavian ethnicity, Viking if you understand. A Tribe called The Rus hired on with the people of the region as mercenary soldiers for the royalty and the Poles.They stayed on and took over.Some of these Vikings were Danes, hence Danegold.Yes, the Russian has known all along about contracting out as soldiers.

Is our credibility as the guarantor of our allies' security worth going to war in Ukraine which isn't even an ally.

I think negotiated partition between the Ukrainian-speaking and Russian-speaking regions might be a possibility.

One thing is for sure, that Pacific pivot is bullshit.We might want to pivot, but we have obligations to our allies in the region.

None of our NATO allies in Eastern Europe are in a position to aid the Ukraine. We could fly troops and vehicles into Hungary, Romania, Poland, and Slovakia, but would they be willing to host us or contribute a brigade each to cross into Ukraine and defend it? Poland might be game, but who else?

This might be the wake-up call NATO needs to remind the member's respective parliaments that Europe isn't some peaceful playland where everyone can hold hands and sing Kumbaya. They still need to have mobile and mechanized forces, they need to be able to be able to transit from France, Belgium, Bavaria, etc to be able defend all of the NATO frontiers.

Russia invades Ukraine by force. Ukrainians are killed by Russian forces. Pro-western Ukrainians form resistance movement and starts to counter Russian and Pro-Russian forces. Civil war in the making.

With US backing, EU threatens sanctions or military action. Russia mobilizes forces around Georgia ...

This is where I'd like everyone to "chew the fat" ...

US has two options and they are both no-win:

1. US goes into a limited conflict with Russia over Ukraine. Because the logistics is too far, US experience loses in Air Force and Marine Air assets. Calls for assistance from across the globe: "You are either with us or you are against us." This brings everyone (again) to war. UK and some NATO and/or EU. Australia and New Zealand.

If US goes to war (no matter how limited) and whatever the outcome, CHINA AWAITS. If US wins, China awaits a weakened armed force. If US loose, Japan, South Korea and/or Taiwan will face China alone. In the dark.

US Forces load for Bear, nuke the Black sea fleet at anchor, and, or at sea. Deploy minefields along the straits of the Bosphorus, nuclear mines are on the table.Counter force strikes launched at targets across Russia forming a ring of arty around Ukraine.Airborne forces take airfields not destroyed, US Marines launch amphibious assault from staging areas in Turkey.Russia interdicts the area known as the GIUK gap with mines, submarines and surface ships cutting supply line for Europe and the med.Some back and forth until borders and demarcation lines are set.Then armistice, Russia wins area controlled by ethnic Russian's.US and NATO take the area that is Ukrainian.Both parts of Ukraine heavily damaged and filled with displaced refugees.Obama, Putin and the Euro's blame Bush.The World moves on.How was that Mark?

The reason central European countries have to play a very shrewd game with Russia is because of dependence on Russian gas, although as we move into Spring the prospect of old ladies in bobble hats dropping like flies because of the cold is diminishing.

The best thing the US could do is start developing a transatlantic LNG trade into the UK and other mainland countries. The infrastructure is all there, at least on the European side of the Atlantic

Because of the shale gas revolution, the US is now in a gas surplus condition

This would do two things

ONE; Impoverish Russia, their military resurgence has been paid for by selling gas to Europe and

TWO; Reduce European dependence on Russian gas and therefore make space for a power shift

"Russian President Vladimir Putin submitted to the Federation Council, the upper house of parliament, the request for consent for the use of Russian armed forces on the territory of Ukraine in order to standardize the socio-political situation in the country. The statement on the matter issued on Saturday, by the Kremlin press service."

America wasn't willing to tangle with the Syrians, she certainly isn't going to get involved in a shooting war with the Russians, treaty or no. My question is, where is the Ukrainian military while all this is happening? How is it that a small force of Russian naval infantry can simply motor out of their naval base and drive across the Crimea to the international airport there without even getting so much as a speeding ticket? Can't the Ukrainians control their own territory? If not, going to war doesn't seem like such a great option. Unless you're Russian, of course.

Because AUTONOMOUS REPUBLIC OF CRIMEA is only a part of Ukraine with own police and internal security force. The only main government forces are border guards and they already under "attack" of Russian units that try to take control of it base, BG ships go to open sea but now the Black Sea fleet ships including a cruiser is on interception course.

Isso me lembrou da crise dos misseis onde o a Russia jogou uma bomba nas calças do tio San agora e a mesma coisa só que na casa deles.It reminded me of the missile crisis where oa Russia dropped a bomb in his pants Uncle San and now the same thing only in their home.

The Russians should take heed and look at the potential for an extended insurgency waged against any Russian occupation, supplied covertly by the West and also the remnants of a huge Ukrainian arsenal, before it attempts to intercede on a large scale. I think they won't intervene directly, they are trying to make it look like there is a pro-Russian grassroots uprising in Eastern Ukraine.

Keep in mind they struggled against Georgia. The only way they pacified Chechnya was by mass firepower and occupation for a territory with a population of less than 2,000,000. Imagine how difficult it would be for Russia to occupy a nation of tens of millions of people. It would make Chechnya look like a picnic and it would bleed Russia white not to mention the tens of billions that it would require every year. Think how easy it would be for the West to covertly supply Western and Northern Ukraine with such a large border. A long, bloody war is precisely what could destabilize Russia and encourage separatist movements throughout the Russian Federation.

At this point, a covert proxy war of militias is probably the most we'll see in the near future if there is a conflict.